DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. NORD ANGLIA EDUCATION INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

house property.\n2.1. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition by treating the rental\nincome as business income without appreciating the fact that the\nAssessing Officer has rightly assessed such income as income from\nhouse property based on the data as per Schedule 22 - Revenue from\noperations (net) to the P&L a/c for the year wherein

ARABOLU VENKATA NAGA DEEPATHI REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, N. SATYARAMANUJAMM ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.178/Viz/2018 (ननधधारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2010-11) Smt.Arabolu Venkata Naga Deepthi Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. By Power Of Attorney Holder (International Taxation) Smt. N.Satyaramanujam Visakhapatnam Flat No.403, Dhanna Apartments Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam [Pan : Atcpa6413A] (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent)

house property is made outside India i.e., in USA and the Id. CIT (Appeals) is not correct in upholding the same. 2. The Ld. AO is not correct in charging interest under section 234A; 234B and 234C and the Id. CIT (Appeals) is not correct in confirming the levy/charge of interest. 3. The above grounds are mutually exclusive and without

INCOMETAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SURENDRA NATH GUBBALA, VISAKHAPATNAM

Bench: Us:

TDS and the capital gains tax payable by the assessee. 34 ITA No.482/Viz/2024 & CO No.03/Viz/2025 Surendra Nath Gubbala 37. Thereafter, the purchasers as per the terms of the MoU, dated 13.06.2019 had at the time when the registered sale deed was executed, inter alia, directly made payments aggregating to Rs. 7 crores out of the sale consideration to the aforementioned

LAKSHMI PRASUNAMBA KODALI,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 279/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Lakshmi Prasunamba Kodali, Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Hyderabad. Income Tax, Pan: Cxrpk7177G Circle-International Tax, Visakhapatnam. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri S.V. Rao Associates ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 10/09/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 25/09/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

TDS related to section 195 (Non-business ITR)”. Accordingly, notice U/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued. Due to change in the incumbency, a notice U/s. 129 of the Act was also issued on 16/09/2021 along with notice U/s. 142(1) of the Act. In response, the assessee submitted the information as called for. On perusal and verification / examining

VALLURUPALLI PRABHU KISHORE,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

house property\" stating that the assessee has shown\nrental income as Nil in the Profit & Loss Account, inspite of earning rental\nincome from several properties.\n6. Being aggrieved by the above additions, assessee filed appeal before\nLd.CIT(A). Assessee reiterated the submissions made before Ld. AO.\nLd.CIT(A) called for Remand Report from the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer\nwhich was received

RAMESH SANGHVI,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, ELURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.504/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2018-19) Ramesh Sanghvi V. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 1 108, 4-4-933 Royal Plaza 23-2-4-6/4 Kks Towers Sultan Bazar, Hyderabad R.R. Pet, Eluru Telangana - 500001 Andhra Pradesh - 534002 [Pan: Ajeps4401J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

House property and income from other sources. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and after verification of the issues, Ld. Assessing Officer [hereinafter in short “Ld. AO"] made an addition of Rs. 1,67,44,623/- arising out of sale of property and wrong claim of interest. Ld. AO thereafter initiated penalty proceedings under section 270A stating that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SRI NARASIMHARAJU KANUMURI, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.267/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Narasimharaju Income Tax, Kanumuri, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aerpk2717F (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS on the payment made to the NRI for the purchase of property. In view of the facts of the case even if the appellant is to be held as 'assessee in default' the DCIT vs. Sri Narasimharaju Kanumuri quantum should have been restricted to Rs.56,26,500/- i.e., the payment made to the NRI by the appellant. However

HARESH KUMAR LALWANI,VIZIANAGARAM vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, VISHAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.264/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2021-22) Haresh Kumar Lalwani V. Pr.Cit -1 22-1-22, Ambati Satram Junction Aayakar Bhavan, Daba Gardens Vizianagaram – 535002 Visakhapatnam – 530020 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aaqpt9248P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

house property of Rs. 3,26,665/-. Subsequently, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny in respect of cash deposits and purchase of immovable property and the Ld. AO has completed the assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 19.12.2022 determining the total income of Rs.73,71,744/- by making addition of Rs.35

PONNAM BHAVANI,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Balakrishnan, S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.331 & 332/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15) Smt. Ponnam Bhavani Vs. Income Tax Officer Vijayawada (International Taxation) Pan:Ajzpp5085E Vijayawada (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri G.V.N. Hari, Advocate रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 24/04/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 28/04/2025 आदेश/Order

house wife and all tax matters are looked after my husband. He is suffering from diabetes and heart problems. Due to his old age and health problems, appeal was not filed in time. I request you to condone the delay and entertain the appeal”. 6. Thus, it is clear that the assessee has stated the reasons that

PONNAM BHAVANI,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Balakrishnan, S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.331 & 332/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15) Smt. Ponnam Bhavani Vs. Income Tax Officer Vijayawada (International Taxation) Pan:Ajzpp5085E Vijayawada (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri G.V.N. Hari, Advocate रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 24/04/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 28/04/2025 आदेश/Order

house wife and all tax matters are looked after my husband. He is suffering from diabetes and heart problems. Due to his old age and health problems, appeal was not filed in time. I request you to condone the delay and entertain the appeal”. 6. Thus, it is clear that the assessee has stated the reasons that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. PRABHU KISHORE VALLURUPALLI, VISAKHAPATNAM

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose and\nrevenue appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

house property\" stating that the assessee has shown\nrental income as Nil in the Profit & Loss Account, inspite of earning rental\nincome from several properties.\n6. Being aggrieved by the above additions, assessee filed appeal before\nLd.CIT(A). Assessee reiterated the submissions made before Ld. AO.\nLd.CIT(A) called for Remand Report from the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer\nwhich was received

ATR WAREHOUSING PRIVATE LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

property, other sources and agricultural income from warehousing filed its return of income for the AY 2014-15 on 30/11/2014 declaring total income of Rs. NIL (Loss of Rs. 2,83,99,853/-). The main source of business income is license fee collected from the tenants for the ware housing godowns at various places viz., Visakhapatnam, Kakinada and Hyderabad

ATR WAREHOUSING PRIVATE LIMITED .,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

property, other sources and agricultural income from warehousing filed its return of income for the AY 2014-15 on 30/11/2014 declaring total income of Rs. NIL (Loss of Rs. 2,83,99,853/-). The main source of business income is license fee collected from the tenants for the ware housing godowns at various places viz., Visakhapatnam, Kakinada and Hyderabad

ATR WAREHOUSING PRIVATE LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

property, other sources and agricultural income from warehousing filed its return of income for the AY 2014-15 on 30/11/2014 declaring total income of Rs. NIL (Loss of Rs. 2,83,99,853/-). The main source of business income is license fee collected from the tenants for the ware housing godowns at various places viz., Visakhapatnam, Kakinada and Hyderabad

GUNTUPALLI NAGESWARA RAO,IBRAHIMPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Hon’Ble

TDS of Rs. 1,86,790/-). Page. No 2 I.T.A.No.378 & 379/VIZ/2025 Guntupalli Nageswara Rao 4. Thereafter, the AO issued a notice under section 148A(b) of the Act calling upon the assessee to place on record documentary evidence to support his claim for multi- facet deductions viz., (i) Loss on house property

GUNTUPALLI NAGESWARA RAO,IBRAHIMPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Hon’Ble

TDS of Rs. 1,86,790/-). Page. No 2 I.T.A.No.378 & 379/VIZ/2025 Guntupalli Nageswara Rao 4. Thereafter, the AO issued a notice under section 148A(b) of the Act calling upon the assessee to place on record documentary evidence to support his claim for multi- facet deductions viz., (i) Loss on house property

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ATR WAREHOUSING PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

TDS etc., and the assessee furnished the required details. 4. After verification of the books of accounts, the Ld. AO noted that during the year the assessee company availed a loan of Rs. 60 lakhs from M/s. Fulfil Vinmay Pvt Ltd, Kolkata and the assessee was asked to furnish the details of loan creditors and the confirmation letter in support

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ANUMOLU AVNASH, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

property, other sources and agricultural income. The assessee has filed its return of income for the AY 2013-14 on 24/12/2013 declaring a total income of Rs. 39,00,000/- and an agricultural income of Rs. 1,04,522/-. A search and seizure operation U/s. 132 of the Act was conducted on 14/10/2015 in the case of the assessee